Posts Made By: James C Chandler Jr

Lee Spain said:

For the record, I don't recall any commandments against fried chicken on Sunday. Christians who close their fried chicken joints on Sundays are turning hungry people against God. If Chik-fil-A's founders were REALLY concerned about living in a pious way, they would not fill cups all the way to the top with ice.

Unless Southern Baptists have drastically changed in the many years since I attended, no fried chicken on Sunday might be grounds for excommunication .

Perhaps this gives hope that eventually the brain structure responsible for sanctimony might be identified and surgically destroyed.

Sanctimony may be an important factor in the world's ills, as it is an independent personality vector which can turn any philosophy or world-view into a pestilence .

We could cure the Moral Majority along with the Evangelical Atheists. We could cure both the Right To Lifers and NARAL. Cure both the Freepers and the Daily Kos. We could cure both Keith Olbermann and Bill O'Reilly.

david elosser said:


http://www.cbsnews.com/blogs/2010/02/17/politics/politicalhotsheet/entry6216739.shtml
"Ten "Miss Me Yet?" items were on the company's list of its top-selling designs...There were no Obama-themed designs on the list,... Bush has stolen the political spotlight, just like Sarah Palin did the week before when she re-surfaced with crib notes written in her palm."

http://shop.cafepress.com/miss-me-yet

David E

Cafe Press must not be a very patriotic company. There was one BHO sticker on the first page, but it is obviously seditious:

Mark Norby said:

Did I see, scrolling at the bottom of my TV screeen, that So. Carolina has asked the Feds permission to start using gold and silver coins, now, in case our economy & paper money (and bus tokens)collapses? Or was I hallucinating because of my meds? Again.

Hi Mark

Not exactly, but a SC Rep Mike Pitts has introduced legislation in that ballpark.

http://www.cbsnews.com/blogs/2010/02/17/politics/politicalhotsheet/entry6217403.shtml

Mark Norby said:

We all know, I'm sure, that divorce is regulated by a secular statute.
Now consider a person of a particular religious group, such as Muslims, (altho the faith under discussion doesn't matter,) who have in their religion their own procedures. What I mean is, even if the state says that a Muslim is divorced, the religion's leaders may still consider the couple still married. They, as individuals may not remarry without fulfilling the religion's requirements for divorce.
Should the state recognize the religion's law against remarrying, and deny the individuals a secular marriage license, which would mean marrying outside of the faith?

Hi Mark

I don't think that civil marriage law should coddle any religious customs. Same rules for everybody, regardless of religion or lack of it.

If a person wants to voluntarily follow a religious marriage custom, then who cares? It is the person's choice.

Numerically in the USA, perhaps Muslims would be a minority example. Catholics have stricter marriage/divorce rules than civil law. Some Jewish sects have strict ideas on the topic, or so I read. Dunno much about it and am easily fooled.

http://www.jewfaq.org/gentiles.htm

"Interfaith Marriages

I once received a message from a man who told me that many Jews do not like gentiles. He knew this because his (Jewish) girlfriend's friends and parents disapproved of him. I explained that these people did not disapprove of him because he was Christian; they disapproved of him because he was a Christian dating a Jew, which is another issue altogether.

Traditional Judaism does not permit interfaith marriages. The Torah states that the children of such marriages would be lost to Judaism (Deut. 7:3-4), and experience has shown the truth of this passage all too well. The 2000 National Jewish Population Survey found that only a third of interfaith couples raise their children Jewish, despite increasing efforts in the Reform and Conservative communities to welcome interfaith couples."

Perhaps one could easily find other common "western" religions that are much pickier on the topic than civil law.

Rod Kaufman said:

The Tea Bag Party needs to pick a party.
Gee, wizz. Which party might they pick?
The answer evidently eludes Sarah:
http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2010/02/17/palin-tea-partiers-need-to-pick-a-party/?fbid=f9Gbf1i2IyA

Hmmm. Many malcontents go to the Tea Parties. There is not unanimity.

A few attitudes which seem fairly common among Tea Partiers:

1. They don't want the govt messing with their personal lives.

2. They don't want the govt messing with their business lives.

3. They don't want high taxes or other govt seizures of property.

4. They don't want out-of-control govt spending to bankrupt the grandchildren.

If they gotta pick a party, sounds an awful lot like the Libertarian Party.

Lee Spain said:

I've been thinking about the guns that every collector almost has to have. I came up with my basic battery here -

http://www.associatedcontent.com/article/2720243/the_beginners_battery_choosing_guns.html?cat=7

I've got everything but a shotgun and I'm not super keen on getting one of those anyway. I'm thinking serious shotgunning would lead me to the chiropractor on a regular basis.

What guns do you think every collector must have?

Hi Lee

Your mention of .22 rifle and pistol seems good. Lots of fun. Relatively inexpensive. Actually useful for more than recreation, depending on the need.

Center fire rifle and handgun, ditto.

I'm not a collector, but it seems more interesting to go to the range with a few guns. Each having its own characteristics to learn.

Analogy-- Though there are numerous exceptions to the rule-- People who become really excellent pianists typically do not devote a great deal of practice tootling bassoon, honking saxophone, pounding drums or framming geetar. Specialization often reigns at the top-- Typically the best alto sax players don't even spend inordinate time honking on tenor, baritone, or soprano sax (though the excellent alto players typically play the other horns decent enough if the situation demands).

Perhaps if one desired to become an excellent marksman, rather than goofing off at the range saturday afternoon-- In that case perhaps one gun would be better than many? I just enjoy occasional plinking. So variety is good.

david elosser said:

"Revised projections now show that about 23,000 workers at and around Kennedy Space Center will lose their jobs because of the shuttles' retirement and the new proposal to cancel the development of new rockets and spacecraft...The updated numbers also include the cancellation of Project Constellation and other initiatives as outlined in the president's 2011 budget..."

http://www.floridatoday.com/article/20100226/NEWS0204/2260321/23-000-now-expected-to-lose-jobs-after-shuttle-retirement

David E

Increase the NASA budget and fire workers. Maybe it will work out if space launch contractors can absorb both the NASA money and some of the ex-employees?

There is such a thing as efficiency, though.

Ferinstance, if the IRS could somehow subcontract, fire half its staff, save money and get the same job done-- On the face of it, wouldn't be a bad plan. Though it would be unfortunate for the laid-off IRS auditors.

Depends on whether NASA will get the job done with the new plan.

Michael Koons said:

Are there any "serious" 3rd party options out there? Who is best organized for the mid term election cycle? Any thoughts about "valid" alternatives that most represent citizen's long term interests?
I just don't know about the status of the reform, green, etc.
Thanks

Hi Michael

Depends on what you mean by 'serious'. Most of the third parties are serious as a heart attack, but have infinitesimally small chance of winning many elections. A massive change in electorate attitudes would be necessary for much third party success.

Greens and Libertarians can get up to one or two percent of the vote. A little higher in some localities.

Looked at one way-- If two percent of the vote were counted nationally, that would be two libertarian senators, two green senators. About 8 libertarian and 8 green representatives. That would be enough to begin affecting policy because certain close legislative votes would have to woo coalition with the third parties. The tiny third parties could affect the legislation, as the 600 pound gorilla parties modify the legislation to buy third party vote. Neither Libertarians or Greens would just naturally be in the back pocket of Republicans or Democrats, and on some issues the Libertarians and Greens would be allied.

But since the vote is spread evenly, the reality is that no Libertarians or Greens get elected to national office hardly anywhere, and a certain percentage of minority voters' views are perpetually un-represented in Washington.

The third parties occasionally win on the local or state levels.

Reform party or others may be stronger than Libertarians and Greens, dunno. Haven't followed the strength of the Greens except noting what percent they win in national elections.

Libertarians have a strength that they manage to run a lot of candidates, and have done this for many years. It is fairly difficult/expensive to even get on a ballot, and requires some minimum amount of organization to consistently put candidates on the ballot, even if they almost always lose.

I also like Libertarians because they never change the message. Libertarians intentionally try to make the platform as logically self-consistent as possible. Libertarians do not oppose position A simply because a rival party advocates position A. The platform comes from principles.

It is a matter of taste whether enough voters agree with the principles or the platform, but at least the Libertarians try to be self-consistent on the matter. For instance, Republicans are pro-choice on schools and anti-choice on abortion. Democrats are pro-choice on abortion and anti-choice on schools. Libertarians are pro-choice on just about everything possible.

http://www.lp.org/

As an aside, some claim Glenn Beck is a libertarian, but IMO he is a rather pee-poor simulation of one. Only a few agreement points really.

Hi Jess

The city of god is already on its way. When it arrives for the rapture, the city of god will first use star trek transporter technology to beam up the living saved. A giant anti-entropy ray will revive the deceased saved.

Sinners will all be banished to New Jersey and then New Jersey will be vaporized by a large asteroid.

After armageddon, the city of god will land at Jerusalem for a millenium of refit, refuel and maintenance, before taking off for the next scheduled rapture planet.

Here is a Hubble picture of the approaching city of god which appeared in the Feb 1994 Weekly World News--



http://weeklyworldnews.com/headlines/11684/new-hubble-images/